Sparks fly at assault-weapons ban hearing on Capitol Hill, ex-cop vows she would 'not comply'

[rangerrebew]

Sparks fly at assault-weapons ban hearing on Capitol Hill, ex-cop vows she would 'not comply'
By Ronn Blitzer | Fox News


Retired police officer: I 'will not comply' with an assault weapons ban

Ms. Dianna Muller speaks to members of the House Judiciary Committee during a hearing on 'Protecting America from Assault Weapons'.

A former police officer made a bold proclamation during a congressional hearing Wednesday regarding a proposed assault-weapons ban: she would not comply.

Dianna Muller, who served in the Tulsa Police Department for 22 years and is the founder of gun advocacy group The DC Project, was among the witnesses at the House Judiciary Committee hearing. The session on an otherwise contentious issue flew largely under the radar amid the Trump-Ukraine controversy and Democrats' impeachment push. But reflecting the gun control divide in the country -- amid a spate of deadly mass shootings that prompted renewed calls for strict laws -- Muller said that such a ban would force lawful gun owners to either give up their arms or become criminals.

Sparks fly at assault-weapons ban hearing on Capitol Hill, ex-cop vows she would 'not comply'

More:  https://www.foxnews.com/politics/house-dems-push-for-assault-weapons-ban

[verga]

This will not end well for the libtards come next November.

[Chosen Daughter]

This will not end well for the libtards come next November.

It wouldn't go well for Trump either if he supported it.

[libertybele]

It wouldn't go well for Trump either if he supported it.

That and nation wide red flag laws ... still waiting to see what happens.  FL is now a red flag law state and it has been used 2,227 times between March 2018, when it took effect, and July 2019.   It is important to realize that out of that number 2,000  guns have been taken way  in the year and a half since the state passed its Red Flag law.  2,000 guns in a year and a half. To me that seem like a staggering amount of weapons being taken. What I didn't realize is that there are 15 other states that have implemented some sort of red flag laws.

https://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/crime/fl-ne-red-flag-law-review-20190921-ygedayoyybaczmpzrrsy7kssdu-story.html

[PeteS in CA]

Depending on how such a ban would be implemented (I do not think it would pass Congress, and I doubt Trump would sign it, but speaking hypothetically ...), it could violate as many as two or more Constitutional Amendments: the Second, by banning a type of weapon in common possession/usage; the "Takings" clause of the Fifth Amendment.

What should scare the @#$% out the gun-grabbers, though, is that Muller was in law enforcement. Her views - both as to what she possesses and as to her almost certain unwillingness to enforce such a ban - are likely shared by many, likely most, in the law enforcement community. IOW, the people who would be called on to enforce the ban would probably decline, if not resist, it.

[Chosen Daughter]

That and nation wide red flag laws ... still waiting to see what happens.  FL is now a red flag law state and it has been used 2,227 times between March 2018, when it took effect, and July 2019.   It is important to realize that out of that number 2,000  guns have been taken way  in the year and a half since the state passed its Red Flag law.  2,000 guns in a year and a half. To me that seem like a staggering amount of weapons being taken. What I didn't realize is that there are 15 other states that have implemented some sort of red flag laws.

https://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/crime/fl-ne-red-flag-law-review-20190921-ygedayoyybaczmpzrrsy7kssdu-story.html

Washington is too I don't know the numbers.

[verga]

Depending on how such a ban would be implemented (I do not think it would pass Congress, and I doubt Trump would sign it, but speaking hypothetically ...), it could violate as many as two or more Constitutional Amendments: the Second, by banning a type of weapon in common possession/usage; the "Takings" clause of the Fifth Amendment.

What should scare the @#$% out the gun-grabbers, though, is that Muller was in law enforcement. Her views - both as to what she possesses and as to her almost certain unwillingness to enforce such a ban - are likely shared by many, likely most, in the law enforcement community. IOW, the people who would be called on to enforce the ban would probably decline, if not resist, it.

I don't remember where I read it, but I saw figure that approximately 50% of the Ar's are privately owned by law enforcement personnel.

[Smokin Joe]

I don't remember where I read it, but I saw figure that approximately 50% of the Ar's are privately owned by law enforcement personnel.

But no one seems to know exactly how many ARs are out there. Numbers range from 5 to 10 million, and that can't account for unfinished receivers made into working rifles, because those were not FFL transferred and not weapons when sold.

If people paid cash, the government can only estimate what is out there, who might have it, and how much ammo they have for it.

But the bottom line is this. THe 2nd Amendment does not grant anyone a Right (in fact, the Constitution doesn't grant any Rights). The COnstitution grants limited powers to the Federal Government,  and limits those powers. The Second Amendment merely recognizes the Right of the People to Keep and Bear Arms, to keep the Militia (Army, in 1780s English) well controlled (regulated) so it could not be used to impose tyranny on The People.
An Army is necessary to the security of a Free State, but so is controlling that Army, which is exactly what the predicate clause is about. The Power, however, is to remain with The People, and Government is to keep its grubby legislating fingers off the Right.
The Second Amendment is not a grant of a Right, but a specific limitation of the power of the Government.

Every one of those SOBs up there in DC swore an oath,

In the House:

“I, AB, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion, and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.”

In the Senate:

I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God.

To even propose legislation encumbering the Second Amendment Rights of American Citizens, these people are in violation of their oaths of office, and what's more, in violation (prima facie) of 18 U.S. Code § 241, conspiring to deprive Americans of their Civil Rights.

Where's the DOJ on this one?

[PeteS in CA]

Whether 5 or 10 or 100 million AR-15s, why are there so many millions of the things "out there" but almost no mass shootings done using the things? They're supposed to be the mass shooter's "Weapon of Choice" or some other bogeyman.

[Smokin Joe]

Whether 5 or 10 or 100 million AR-15s, why are there so many millions of the things "out there" but almost no mass shootings done using the things? They're supposed to be the mass shooter's "Weapon of Choice" or some other bogeyman.

Well, lately, the most effective mass murderer's weapons of choice in the US have been

Two Boeing 767-200ERs (Twin Towers)

a Boeing 757-200 (Pentagon)

Another Boeing 757-200 (Shanksville, PA)

A rental truck (Make, model unknown although the VIN from the axle should have revealed both) (OK CIty)

So, trucks and airplanes take the top 5 spots.


Although subject to historical contention and somewhat questionable as to intent, blankets have been blamed for the alleged largest mass killing in the (now) US, although debate exists as to whether it was European introduced Smallpox or an earlier plague which severely reduced American Indian numbers on the continent, and as to whether any plague introduced was done so with malice and forethought and reasonable anticipation of that effect.

[sneakypete]

Will someone please explain to me WHY we "need" such laws,when for as long as I can remember,the police have had no trouble at all getting a court order to TEMPORARILY seize any weapons in the possession of someone considered to be a threat?

Granted,under the original system it was harder to have guns seized because there had to have been an actual court ruling issued to seize the guns from that individual,but nonetheless,this system was already in place and had been working for 100+ years.

This is nothing put upping the water in the pot by 10 degrees to get it closer to boiling. Ten years of this,and then they will be ready to proclaim weapons are too dangerous to "allow" regular citizens (NOT the politically-connected or their bodyguards) keep them in their homes,and to own one you MUST belong to a police-approved gun club and keep the gun and all ammunition for it stored there,and be required to get a police permit to be allowed to leave the gun club with it.

Gee,I wonder  how hard it will be to confiscate guns to destroy them once THAT system is in place?

Also,will someone PLEASE remind me WHY we fought the Nazi's,and spent decades and trillions of dollars "fighting" the USSR in the so-called "Cold War"?

Wouldn't it have been simpler to have just surrendered in 1941?

[sneakypete]

I don't remember where I read it, but I saw figure that approximately 50% of the Ar's are privately owned by law enforcement personnel.

@verga

LEO's need not worry about it. THEY will be "allowed" to keep the weapons they have at home.

For at least a decade,anyway. By the end of Year One that right will slowly be eroded by "small" steps like requiring them to register and get permission from the head of their organization. A few years will pass,and suddenly they will have to leave them at the police station and check them out when they want to use them,providing they bring them back the same day,and can account for all the ammo they checked out by presenting empty cases.

Eventually they will be subjected to the same system perfected in the "Holy Mother Communist Russia" that police there used. They would check out their hand guns and ammunition,and sign for them. At the end of each shift they had to turn them back in,and account for any missing ammo or shots fired. I am not sure if "special police" like those that worked for the NKVD had to do this,but I am guessing all but management and other white collar cops like detectives did.

BTW,on my last trip to Russia a couple of years after the collapse of Communism,I took several copies of The Shotgun News to every Russian gunshop I could find,and dropped them off. You should have seen the looks in their eyes when they scanned the ads and asked me "Regular people can just buy these any time they want?????"

BTW-2,it seemed that MOST gun shop owners in Russia back then were ex-cops. Which makes sense since nobody,with the exception of trappers in Siberia, but cops or soldiers in Russia had even shot a rifle or handgun. Even then I am guessing the trappers were ex-soldiers.

The ONE universal truth about governments and the people who run them is they are both protective of their privileges.

[sneakypete]

But the bottom line is this. THe 2nd Amendment does not grant anyone a Right (in fact, the Constitution doesn't grant any Rights). The COnstitution grants limited powers to the Federal Government,  and limits those powers. The Second Amendment merely recognizes the Right of the People to Keep and Bear Arms, to keep the Militia (Army, in 1780s English) well controlled (regulated) so it could not be used to impose tyranny on The People.

@Smokin Joe
@mystery-ak

Thanks,Joe! WE rule the legislators via the ballot box,and THEY owe their positions to US. This can never be stated too often.

In FACT,that one paragraph would make a good addition to the welcome page and at the top of other pages on political web sites.  Leftists need to be informed of this for the first time,and even we conservatives need to have our memories refreshed occasionally.

And the political professionals need to be reminded of this on a daily basis.